tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post2178903569998904635..comments2023-10-03T07:38:34.367-04:00Comments on The Evilutionary Biologist: Interview with Victor AmbrosJohn Dennehyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02522347714772131441noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-77297426413862227312010-03-09T00:14:59.617-05:002010-03-09T00:14:59.617-05:00Here is what I do not understand. If evolution is ...Here is what I do not understand. If evolution is supposedly rock solid science, why are the evolutionist so terrified of the teaching of Intelligent Design? Now I am not talking about teaching the Bible, but simply teaching Intelligent Design. No evolutionist can deny that a cell contains organelles, that are more complex than any man made technology the world has seen. It was asked of one scientist "if Darwin thought a cell to be a Volvo, what do we now know a cell to be?" the answer was "a galaxy". The Greek word kosmos, from where we get our word cosmos literally means order. A 3rd century evolutionary philosopher wrote "I cannot understand why there is kosmos (order) in the universe. Now evolutionist will claim that if Intelligent Design is taught, the creationist would be pushing their ideas on people, yet isn't that exactly what the evolutionist is doing by not allowing the teaching of I.D.? Students are smart, why not give them evidence for evolution and Intelligent Design, and let them follow the evidence wherever that may lead. Isn't that the purpose of science to begin with? Let’s start with the term the “theory of evolution.” A scientific theory is In the sciences generally, a scientific theory (the same as an empirical theory) comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, together with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a class of phenomena.4 Notice I emphasized observable phenomena, because for something to be a scientific theory there has to be observable proof that verifies the scientific theory itself. There has to be physical evidence of evolution occurring (remember from now on when I mention evolution I am talking about macro-evolution. The belief that our ancient ancestor was pond scum). So what am I saying, for something to be a scientific theory there has to be evidence that you can look at of the theory occurring. Here is where the first problem lies no one has ever witnessed the occurrence of evolution. NO ONE! Also there is no proof that verifies evolution ever occurred, so to say in its most basic form that evolution is a theory, according to the definition of a scientific theory is wrong. So evolution is not even a theory because there is no observable evidence that it ever occurred.abandonedtoJesus24-7https://www.blogger.com/profile/08709228751351462650noreply@blogger.com